93 Decision Citation: BVA 93-15221
Y93
BOARD OF VETERANS' APPEALS
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20420
DOCKET NO. 92-09 129 ) DATE
)
)
)
THE ISSUES
1. Entitlement to service connection for headaches.
2. Entitlement to service connection for hypertension.
REPRESENTATION
Appellant represented by: Disabled American Veterans
WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL
Appellant
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD
C. Lawson, Associate Counsel
INTRODUCTION
The appellant, a veteran, served on active duty from
September 1945 to April 1947. The Department of Veterans
Affairs (VA) Roanoke, Virginia, regional office (RO) denied
service connection for headaches and hypertension in
December 1991. A notice of disagreement was received in
February 1992. In March 1992, an RO decision continued the
denials, a statement of the case (SOC) was issued, and a
substantive appeal was received. The case was received and
docketed at the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) in June
1992. Disabled American Veterans represents the appellant
on appeal. A hearing was held on October 26, 1992, in
Washington, D.C., before Jonathan E. Day, who is a member of
the Board section rendering the final determination in this
claim and was designated by the Chairman to conduct that
hearing, pursuant to 38 U.S.C.A. § 7102(b) (West 1991).
During the hearing, the issue of service connection for a
psychiatric disorder, previously denied by an April 1947 RO
decision, was raised. This matter is referred to the RO for
appropriate action.
REMAND
The appellant testified before the Board at a hearing
conducted in October 1992. The appellant alleges that he
received treatment for headaches shortly after service
discharge at the Los Angeles, California, VA medical center,
at Sepulveda. He also reports having been treated for
headaches by a Dr. Kolodny in Baltimore, Maryland, after
1967, and through Kaiser-Permanente Medical Centger in
Sunnyvale, California, when he was working for Lockheed
Aircraft before that. He also states that hypertension was
diagnosed about one and one half to two years before the
hearing at the Board in October 1992, apparently at the
Mountain Home, Tennessee, VA medical center. He also
maintains that his preservice headaches worsened in service
due to participation in nuclear testing on the USS San
Marcos (LSD 25) in Operation Crossroads in 1946.
The VA's duty to assist him includes obtaining relevant
medical records. Ivey v. Derwinski, 2 Vet.App. 320 (1992).
Given the circumstances of the case, the case is REMANDED to
the RO for the following action:
1. Copies of the appellant's VA inpatient
and outpatient treatment folders from the
Los Angeles, California, VA medical center
at Sepulveda after March 1947 should be
obtained and incorporated into the claims
folder. Additionally, the appellant should
provide information and signed
authorization for the release of his
medical records to enable VA to assist him
in obtaining the records of treatment he
received through Kaiser-Permanente in
Sunnyvale, California while he worked for
Lockheed prior to 1967, and from Abraham L.
Kolodny, M.D., whose address is 9101
Franklin Square Drive, Suite 320,
Baltimore, Maryland 21237. These should
then be obtained by the RO. His records
from the VA facility which diagnosed
hypertension in approximately 1990 or 1991
should should also be obtained. It appears
that the Mountain Home, Tennessee VA
medical center may have diagnosed it.
2. If the medical evidence obtained as a
result of this remand discloses a diagnosis
of a psychiaric disability other than a
personality disorder, the veteran should be
afforded a psychiatric examination to
determine the correct diagnosis of any
psychiatric disability present, its
relationship to the symptoms displayed in
service, and its relationship to any
headache disorder. The examiner should
review the claim folder prior to the
examination and should provide a written
opinion on these points.
Thereafter, the RO should again review the appellant's
claims. This review should include readjudication of the
claim for service connection for headaches based on
aggravation. The pertinent laws and regulations should be
included in the supplemental SOC, if appropriate. If any
action remains adverse to the appellant, the case should be
returned to this Board in accordance with the usual
appellate procedures, unless he specifically withdraws his
appeal. No action is required of the appellant until he is
further informed. The purpose of this REMAND is to assist
the appellant per 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107 (West 1991). No
inference is to be drawn regarding the final disposition of
the claims.
BOARD OF VETERANS' APPEALS
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20420
*
J. E. DAY (MEMBER TEMPORARILY ABSENT)
SAMUEL W. WARNER
*38 U.S.C.A. § 7102(a)(2)(A) (West 1991) permits a Board of
Veterans' Appeals Section, upon direction of the Chairman of
the Board, to proceed with the transaction of business
without awaiting assignment of an additional Member to the
Section when the Section is composed of fewer than three
Members due to absence of a Member, vacancy on the Board or
inability of the Member assigned to the Section to serve on
the panel. The Chairman has directed that the Section
proceed with the transaction of business, including the
issuance of decisions, without awaiting the assignment of a
third Member.
Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 1991), only a decision of the
Board of Veterans' Appeals is appealable to the United
States Court of Veterans Appeals. This remand is in the
nature of a preliminary order and does not constitute a
decision of the Board on the merits of your appeal.